Don't wonder too hard.

The answer is very close to nil.

Darrell Vienna, who is most often the smartest guy in the room, VERY critical.. Santa Anita officials say that the power-harrowing should straighten things out, but this is not a good sign so early in the meet.

Lenny Shulman on the trainers meeting at SA yesterday...

SoCal Trainers Knock Pro-Ride Surface
by Lenny Shulman
http://news.bloodhorse.com/article/48696.htm

About 40 Southern California-based trainers met with Pro-Ride head Ian Pearse Jan. 7 at Santa Anita Park to voice their concerns over the condition of Santa Anita’s synthetic racing surface, which Pearse installed a year ago.

Unlike meetings last year, where a majority of trainers defended the installation of synthetic surfaces at the state’s racetracks, the vast number of trainers who spoke at Santa Anita this time expressed disappointment with the performance and condition of Pearse’s Pro-Ride surface. Pearse added materials to the Cushion Track synthetic surface that failed to drain after heavy rains early in 2008.

I wonder if I'm alone in finding it quite funny that they billed this stuff as all weather and said it doesn't need maintenance but Pearse says that's ridiculous now. He says they have to develop a different maintenance plan for the winter than they do for the summer. He says that he thinks the winter weather and the high volume of traffic on the course are what's causing the problems. I think this is incredible. Did they not know winter was coming? Did they not know that SA was one of the most heavily used courses in the world? How can this not have been planned for?

this is what happens when people rush off into decisions without doing the proper research....this never would have happened if 18 horses did not breakdown over 43 days at del mar a couple years back.

Good point.

Now if we can add 1 + 1 what do we get.

18 horses broke down at DM a few years back--on a "dirt" surface.

horses are continuing to breakdown on a "synthetic' surface.

Answer---Maybe it has nothing to do with the track and everything to do with whats put inside the horses that have dramatically dropped the number of starts the T-Bred makes in a career and have made them more injury prone and brittle.

The same horseman that were bitching about the DM dirt are bitching about the SA proride. At least they are consistent that they dont want the blame but would rather blame someone or something else.

Or maybe in the good old days just as many horses broke down as now but because no one was really paying attention to it no one bothered counting...

according to tbredtimes 1,500 train over the main SA track every morning.

"Some of you must have a case of amnesia," said trainer David Hoffmans, an advocate of synthetic surfaces, referring to all the fatalities and injuries on dirt.

http://thoroughbredtimes.com/nationa...c-surface.aspx

Turfway is doing their due diligence research on their poly surface as well .

http://news.bloodhorse.com/article/48705.htm

:tro: :tro: :tro: :tro:

Vienna later stated, “After this meeting, I have no confidence that Ian Pearse can fix this track. Trainers don’t want to drive off owners by saying these tracks are no good, but the problems we had with dirt tracks haven’t been cured. We still have the disease, just with different injuries. The trajectory of these synthetic surfaces is they get worse over time.”

Extra maintenance may not necessarily work on Santa Anita’s surface, because, trainers say, the harrowing equipment tends to break up the track’s ingredients.

“They are going to try and manipulate the track to make it work,” said Vienna. “We should be planning to put in a better one; doing the groundwork to find out what works and is sustainable. Synthetic surfaces are not sustainable.”



it's not as tho these surfaces can be completely changed out year to year. the cost would be astronomical. things is, these synthetics work overseas--has anyone bothered to compare the amount of runners a day over there to the amounts over here? i bet they don't compare. we all know that euros mostly run on turf, that most of their turf meets are short, as a turf course can't survive a lot of racing. i think the sheer volume here is the main problem with these tracks. they aren't maintainable, they have too much traffic on them to last for very long.
it's a huge mess.

and i also think cannon has a point. only in the last few years have people paid much attention to injuries/fatalities. i wonder if the %'s have changed over the years.

Put the dirt back but keep the drainage system installed underneath.That shouldn't cost much.

An unfortunate thing about horse racing is sometimes horses breakdown.
Sometimes they happen because a horse has a injury that the trainer can detect prior to running the horse. Sometimes a horse just takes a bad step.

I think once there is large enough of a sample size on synthetics, the breakdown numbers will be very close to what they are on dirt tracks.

perhaps santa anita and golden gate need to look at hollywood park and del mars surfaces. i think hollywood has had no trouble at all, and del mar apparently got their surface figured out.

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/nat...-injuries.aspx

They best line was they are sending soil samples out to be tested. For what exactly? Unsafe soil traces? CSI Fairgrounds?

That is kinda funny CSI Fairgrounds, but at least they are doing something.
It is a very high amount of fatalities here.
I do know this the breakdowns are occuring in the same area. I also noticed the other day that the track stayed very, very wet which is unusual, there wasn't that much rain and it normally dries out really quickly. Puzzling...Bob Fortus article says the new track supervisor went and checked the area and said it was just a freak thing...freak thing to me is that it was in the exact same spot, seems to me they should really be checking that area out. Maybe the snow changed the surface.
I'm going today and going to ask on the backside what they really are thinking.

And bar toe grabs.

I guess the evil toe grabs have to go again...


http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...ike-at-turfway

As I have stated here before, all the hand wringing over breakdown rates and trying to determine the causes is a huge waste of time. Turfway this winter is a great example. First there were alot of breakdowns compared to previous years, then there werent hardly any, now there are a lot again. let me guess that March there wont be many...

They are trying to find the magic bullet, toe grabs, surfaces, medication, vet checks, whips, etc. There is none. Why they continue to publicize this information is beyond me.

What kind of shoes do you like using on your horses and why do they work so much better on off tracks?

Horse shoes.

Don't make me ask Slewis from PA.

Thankfully, from a sportsmedicine standpoint, the minority opinion.

Yeah well sports medicine hasn't done a whole hell of a lot to change breakdown rates over the years. If you cant see that publishing monthly breakdown rates is a waste of time and leads people to draw completely unfounded conclusions that that is your cross to bear. Simply releasing data can do nothing but further confuse the issue.

Who still buys yearlings with multiple vascular channels showing in their sesamoids on the prepurchase rads?

Does anyone keep a big growthy young colt at pasture with virtually no breaking or work at all until he's three? Do people feed that big growthy colt high protein to make him grow more quickly?

Anybody still use 6mm toe rims?

Do most give a horse starting with little bit of sore shins complete pasture rest for 60 days, or work him through it?

In some eyes they are damned if they do (release data) and damned if they don't (evil hiding of data).

IMO, the more info out there, the better.

I fail to see the logic of your post?

So in your opinion releasing the data on a monthly basis by the KHRC is a good thing? Since they have no idea why it changes radically (and they are supposedly experts) what is the benefit? To confuse matters further?

The reality is that will do a study, find that the conclusions are the same as always (undetermined) and move on to do more studies. This puzzle has NO ANSWER!!! While research into horse health and soundness specifically is underfunded and greatly needed, what they are trying to do in tying all breakdowns together and finding a common cause is an impossible task.

I completely disagree.

I don't understand how you can say on one hand research is underfunded and needed, then dismiss it out of hand saying one will never be able to reach any useful conclusions.

Dr. Mary Scollary is trying to collect detailed information, but some won't participate.

All the examples I listed are topics that sportsmedicine has looked at, and within each topic one path leads to increased breakdowns, and taking a different path doesn't. Yes, sportsmedicine has helped decrease breakdown rates.

You are right, breakdowns have multiple causes. That doesn't mean we can't start to figure out the contributors.

Yes, I'm glad KHRC is releasing the numbers, and being open about how many occur. I sure don't look at them as "experts" on breakdown causality.

I hate to tell you but we already know the vast majority of WHY horses breakdown. Because they are made of flesh and blood!

How has sports medicine helped decrease breakdown rates when we dont even have accurate numbers now let alone from years ago?

This is all bs. Despite the medical advances, horses still get hurt and as evidenced by the chaos in reporting the breakdowns in CA and Turfway there isnt any real advances in decreasing these rates.

Releasing the numbers is a terrible idea. There is nothing to be gained from it on either side. If the numbers go down then the tracks crow that they have a safe track and the rules are correct. If the numbers spike, everybody wrings hands and adjusts rules and come up with theories. Nothing positive is being reported to a general public that has little understanding of the issue.

We can report all the injuries that they can record but each and everyone is different. We dont even know how or when many of these injuries occur. The subject is far too broad to be able to narrow it to a few things.

The fact that human judgement is involved makes the regulation part flawed just as human judgement is. Mary Scollay has great intentions and is a nice lady. She should keep the numbers to herself until she has finished her study because getting this out of the publics eyes is in the best interests of horseracing until there are conclusions (even though those conclusions will be as murky in detail as most studies on thoroughbreds)

I think (and this just my opinon) that the biggest contributing factor to horses breaking down is racing them . Ha I solved the problem.
Seriously , accidents happen but the thing I see the most is people not being diligent caretakers , when I see certain trainers sitting at clockers corner all morning being more interested in visiting with their friends than going back and forth to the barn and actually looking at the horses it is hard for me to feel bad for the trainer when they have one break down. I know that trainers have several strings and rely on assistants to look at the horses daily (guys like Whitey that works for Pletch goes back and forth with each set ) but I cant help noticing the one's that never seem to be at the barn in the morning and when they have one breakdown it really doesnt shock me as I think they really prolly have no clue whats going on in their own shed.

The answer to number one is obvious

Number 2 is a bit strange. Why would anyone keep a horse in a paddock till they were 3? When has this ever been popular? And if they were big and growthy why would anyone want them to grow?

Number 3- They cant but the elimination of them has hardly kept horses sounder

number 4- People do both and both can work depending on the horse. people also scrape shins, pin fire and even freeze fire them. Some horses get shins and they go away. Some get them over and over again.

I give up.

Yeah, it's all bs.

Honu just mentioned the white elephant in the room and you are giving up now? Hell it is trainer pile on time!

Seriously the human element cannot be quantified. There are some guys that do things that are beyond the line. All breakdowns arent surprises.

Im not saying its trainer pile on time , I respect what good trainers do and how they take care of their horses and I dont know you in real life but I assume you really care about your horses. What I dont respect and have a hard time grasping is how it is more important to visit with your friends than be at the barn actually training.

He definitely does.

I understand and wasnt taking offense. Let not kid ourselves into thinking that some horses that are sent out to run have no business being out there.

This I know , in fact just about my whole career as a jockey was riding the kind of horses that most likely shouldnt have been racing but when that is all there is ,what does a person with limited ability and the desire to be a jockey do.
I am very gratefull that I have gotten to where I am in this buisness , Im gratefull to be working for someone who really does care and has the knowledge to know when to hold em and when to fold them.
There are really no full proof ways to prevent horses from getting injuries other than not racing them , even the best horseman still have horses get hurt , all we in this industry can do is our best , unfortunitly there are people who dont do their best or who just plain dont care.

Does anyone know if there's been a study to look at injury rates on synthetic surfaces broken down by where the horses have been primarily racing or training prior to the injury? It's one thing to talk about x injuries per y starts, but I would be curious to see if there's a statistically significant difference between injury rates per y starts broken down by horses which have been racing and training over that surface vs. horses which had been racing and training over other surfaces, such natural dirt, turf or other synthetic surfaces.

I don't think anyone has specifically looked at that from the sense you are coming from - they generally have compared breakdown rates at the same facility before and after synthetic installation without separating out where horses are training or shipping in from (Europe, Australia). As you know training locations vary more in countries other than the USA.

You might consider that the non-USA studies are nearly all turf (no dirt), so it's virtually all turf to synthetic.

Go here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez

Enter as your search terms thoroughbred equine

That will get you a couple thousand hits (limited to recent), then you can narrow (don't narrow too specifically initially). You also can do an advanced search as alot of that data is now older than 5 years so is falling off the "current" screen and doesn't come up unless you search diligently (I was trying to find the NYRA data on breakdowns at Aque-Sar-Bel from the 1980's)